GreenGoo wrote:First, what has any of this to do with Romney being the next president of the US? This is the entire purpose of this thread. The victim is almost completely irrelevant to the conversation in this thread. Feel free to start a "homosexuals are more bullied than D&D kids" thread if you want.
initiated this thread - and the topic of bullying and gay kids is relevant in a story about, among other things, a gay kid who got bullied by Romney - I think I can be a judge of how relevant it is to this thread.
Next, Red cars get more speeding tickets than other cars. Do we need more laws to govern red cars?
If Red cars were four times as likely to get into deadly traffic accidents than other colored cars, I'd at the very least want a study to figure out why the hell that's the case - that's not just a statistical oddity, it's not even merely statistically significant. That's a statistical red sign saying something is very, very wrong
We need to be very careful when we start treating crimes against one set of victims differently than the exact same crime against another set of victims. I get that that is what you want. I don't see what that has to do with the first point.
Third, hate crimes are already on the books.
I'm not even sure why you're bringing this up. (And hate crimes in relations to sexual preference is only "on the books" in some states, and gender identity in even fewer).
Fourth, Romney is already a conservative. While I understand that some homosexuals vote conservative. They are a tiny minority even within the homosexual minority group. Given that, why do you care what Romney's motivations are? Were you planning on voting for him? Do you just want to know what level of dislike you should have for him?
I'm not sure why that's relevant - are we only permitted to post if the issue is a factor to our 2012 decision? but if so:
I was undecided.
For a number of reasons, of which this is a major one, I now think it next to impossible for me to vote for Romney.
But I am still undecided.
This is like having someone up on sexual assault of a minor charges, but you want to know what the gender of the victim was, because you feel specific empathy with one gender. I get that YOU care.
No it's really fucking not. It's more like you're going around after a story about a rape and saying "Maybe the rape victim was a female, but we don't really know that. They could just as likely have been a male, and speaking of which, male-victim rape is a serious issue and should receive just as much attention and resources in prevention as female-victim rape" when the article states they were female.
Because bullying is targeted at homosexuals more than other people, bullying against them is more heinous than hetero-kids?
No, the same exact act of physical bullying is not more heinous because the victim is gay as opposed to straight. AS I HAVE REPEATEDLY STATED
and which you ignore.
But a gay victim is much more likely to be the victim of bullying and much more likely to be a victim of a more heinous level of bullying.
Again, going back to the example I laid out, if you were the head of the police force, would you distribute your policemen equally around a city, or would you position more of them in locations more prone to crime?